It is essential for human beings to live collectively. It is also essential that there are some hostilities, struggles and conflicts (wars) during this union. Completely peaceful world it is jast a wish. It is perhaps not possible to make this wish entirely possible; but by making some legal arrangements and establishing an atmosphere of peace, approaching the peace may not be impossible. Examples of coexistence based on the "system of na-tions" and "national judges" in the past do not coincide with the demands of today's multi-cultural, multi-religious, multi-identity and multi-ethnic postmodern world. The religion in this context shows distinctive function rather than unifying function. We know that the greatest turmoil and wars in history are due to religion. It can be said that these religious (sectarian) wars also emerged as a result of the desires of the owners of religious institu-tions (priests, cardinals, rabbi, religious leaders, etc.) to gain power (hegemony). To over-estimate the concept of tolerance does not only condemn the subject to ambiguity; it re-duces the willingness to live together to accept the other. Consent size tradition and reli-gions hungry broadcasting is unacceptable. Living together is based on consent, living to-gether respects the law and exists as a necessity of heterogeneous and cosmopolitan socie-ties. It can be stated through examples that the most important factor that destroys this obligation or peace is politics.
Living together, willingness, tolerance, law, pluralism.